6 ms·

Both things can be true. A future where people dont have to stand by a conveyor belt or follow a ball with a camera to feed their families is a better vision o

Both things can be true. A future where people dont have to stand by a conveyor belt or follow a ball with a camera to feed their families is a better vision of the future. While the transition also presents an immense painpoint and must be handled with the utmost care. We should find ways to keep everyone in society and with an income ASAP.

buran77 6y ago
The jobs AI replaces now are the kind of jobs a few pick because they love them (hence would enjoy another job less), and most pick because they have no other choice (hence they chose the best they could and any other job is almost guaranteed to be worse). These most basic of jobs are taken by people who aren't really qualified to do a more skilled or better paying job and to get qualified they certainly need resources. Losing the job they have does not help. Almost nobody chooses a cameraman, truck driver, or supermarket cashier jobs if they actually had a legitimate choice between that and a well paid tech job. But most people here have well paid tech jobs and a narrowed view of the issue. Imagine taking that old food away from a poor person because they now have the possibility to go have a nice juicy steak.
- xxs 6y ago
  >Almost nobody chooses ... truck driver The experience from a European logistics company is that truck drivers love their jobs - travels (different countries), adventure and childhood dreams.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- nicoffeine 6y ago
  > Almost nobody chooses a cameraman, truck driver, or supermarket cashier jobs if they actually had a legitimate choice between that and a well paid tech job. The world beyond a chair in front of a computer is a lot more interesting to most people. I know more than a few in tech who dream of having a job where they get to interact with reality in a more direct way. And I guarantee you if the pay was closer, you'd see a lot more people adjusting their lifestyle and ditching the tech grind.
  - buran77 6y ago
    > I know more than a few in tech who dream [...] And I guarantee you if the pay was closer, you'd see Indeed, dreams and ifs. It's no coincidence that the dreams that stay dreams are for the higher end jobs, and the ifs that stay ifs are for the lower end jobs.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  > Almost nobody chooses a cameraman, truck driver, or supermarket cashier jobs if they actually had a legitimate choice between that and a well paid tech job Cameramen make good middle class to upper middle class incomes, have good benefits, are often unionized, and their jobs take skill. I think this might be an example of tech bubble myopia.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - buran77 6y ago
    What you call myopia I call seeing the bigger picture. Offer some cameramen the tech salary for a tech job (pretend the qualifications are there) and see if most flat out refuse because you're right and they have a good salary and union, or would hypothetically accept it because I'm right and people would go for a higher salary as long as the job isn't an extreme example of unsatisfying work.
    - heavyset_go 6y ago
      From the people that I know who work in media and entertainment, they wouldn't trade their careers for the world.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - buran77 6y ago
        I'd never claim nobody picks a job because they love it above all else, just that the lower-end the job, the less likely that happens. On the other hand very few of the people I heard saying "not for the world" ever properly tested their resolve. I think you choose to see the tip of the pyramid in this particular "cameraman" case. You pick the few with the better conditions, rather than the many, many with the worse ones. It's pretty much a certainty that most cameramen in the world do not have upper middle class incomes, good benefits, or unions on their side yet their job is just as targeted by automation as the ones you think of. The couple or truckers I know making $200+k a year are also the exception rather than the rule. Look, I know camera operators who are expected to process and edit the material and get paid their weight in gold. Most others are "just" camera operators and get paid barely middle class salaries. The jobs that get automated are these second type because it's easier to train an algorithm or another human to do them than for many other jobs. It also means there's less room to be choosy. And people also learn to love what they do.
- iso1631 6y ago
  > Almost nobody chooses [to be] a cameraman We just said goodbye to a camerman with 30+ years of experience, from Diana's crash in Paris, to the fall of Ghadaffi, interviewing multiple US presidents one day, and Rohingya fleeing into Bangladesh (much of which was caused by the tech industry - specifically facebook) the next. And you think that's not a choice?
  - buran77 6y ago
    > And you think that's not a choice? Everything is a choice in the end. But I also think that out of the hundreds of thousands of camera operators in the world you had to look for an exceptional one to make a point. Before you take it personal and form a general opinion based on that one anecdote sit on it for a minute and think, is this example relevant for the discussion? Is he the rule or the exception? What about the situation from the article? The operator who's sitting in a small football stadium of a small Scottish second league team pointing the camera at what could be charitably described as an average football match for 90 minutes? How many operators filmed Diana's crash in Paris and the fall of Ghadaffi, and how many only film mundane, mediocre things their entire career? > (much of which was caused by the tech industry - specifically facebook) I took the tech industry just as a good example of an all round good, well paying job in general, not to pass judgement on what it brings to the world. My comment history could tell you as much. Mass media deserves its share of jabs as I'm sure you agree. But neither of the jabs make any my arguments or conclusion any less valid.
    - iso1631 6y ago
      If you're a high school kid in Inverness wanting to earn a couple of bob on a Saturday afternoon, you could go stack shelves in tesco, or you could point a camera at a local football match, and start getting useful experience. Which is more fulfilling? You might find you're not that good at it, you don't like standing out in the cold, but you might find you have a talent for it, and that leads onto a more formal training course

buran77 6y ago

The jobs AI replaces now are the kind of jobs a few pick because they love them (hence would enjoy another job less), and most pick because they have no other choice (hence they chose the best they could and any other job is almost guaranteed to be worse). These most basic of jobs are taken by people who aren't really qualified to do a more skilled or better paying job and to get qualified they certainly need resources. Losing the job they have does not help. Almost nobody chooses a cameraman, truck driver, or supermarket cashier jobs if they actually had a legitimate choice between that and a well paid tech job. But most people here have well paid tech jobs and a narrowed view of the issue. Imagine taking that old food away from a poor person because they now have the possibility to go have a nice juicy steak.

xxs 6y ago
>Almost nobody chooses ... truck driver The experience from a European logistics company is that truck drivers love their jobs - travels (different countries), adventure and childhood dreams.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
nicoffeine 6y ago
> Almost nobody chooses a cameraman, truck driver, or supermarket cashier jobs if they actually had a legitimate choice between that and a well paid tech job. The world beyond a chair in front of a computer is a lot more interesting to most people. I know more than a few in tech who dream of having a job where they get to interact with reality in a more direct way. And I guarantee you if the pay was closer, you'd see a lot more people adjusting their lifestyle and ditching the tech grind.
- buran77 6y ago
  > I know more than a few in tech who dream [...] And I guarantee you if the pay was closer, you'd see Indeed, dreams and ifs. It's no coincidence that the dreams that stay dreams are for the higher end jobs, and the ifs that stay ifs are for the lower end jobs.
heavyset_go 6y ago
> Almost nobody chooses a cameraman, truck driver, or supermarket cashier jobs if they actually had a legitimate choice between that and a well paid tech job Cameramen make good middle class to upper middle class incomes, have good benefits, are often unionized, and their jobs take skill. I think this might be an example of tech bubble myopia.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- buran77 6y ago
  What you call myopia I call seeing the bigger picture. Offer some cameramen the tech salary for a tech job (pretend the qualifications are there) and see if most flat out refuse because you're right and they have a good salary and union, or would hypothetically accept it because I'm right and people would go for a higher salary as long as the job isn't an extreme example of unsatisfying work.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    From the people that I know who work in media and entertainment, they wouldn't trade their careers for the world.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - buran77 6y ago
      I'd never claim nobody picks a job because they love it above all else, just that the lower-end the job, the less likely that happens. On the other hand very few of the people I heard saying "not for the world" ever properly tested their resolve. I think you choose to see the tip of the pyramid in this particular "cameraman" case. You pick the few with the better conditions, rather than the many, many with the worse ones. It's pretty much a certainty that most cameramen in the world do not have upper middle class incomes, good benefits, or unions on their side yet their job is just as targeted by automation as the ones you think of. The couple or truckers I know making $200+k a year are also the exception rather than the rule. Look, I know camera operators who are expected to process and edit the material and get paid their weight in gold. Most others are "just" camera operators and get paid barely middle class salaries. The jobs that get automated are these second type because it's easier to train an algorithm or another human to do them than for many other jobs. It also means there's less room to be choosy. And people also learn to love what they do.
iso1631 6y ago
> Almost nobody chooses [to be] a cameraman We just said goodbye to a camerman with 30+ years of experience, from Diana's crash in Paris, to the fall of Ghadaffi, interviewing multiple US presidents one day, and Rohingya fleeing into Bangladesh (much of which was caused by the tech industry - specifically facebook) the next. And you think that's not a choice?
- buran77 6y ago
  > And you think that's not a choice? Everything is a choice in the end. But I also think that out of the hundreds of thousands of camera operators in the world you had to look for an exceptional one to make a point. Before you take it personal and form a general opinion based on that one anecdote sit on it for a minute and think, is this example relevant for the discussion? Is he the rule or the exception? What about the situation from the article? The operator who's sitting in a small football stadium of a small Scottish second league team pointing the camera at what could be charitably described as an average football match for 90 minutes? How many operators filmed Diana's crash in Paris and the fall of Ghadaffi, and how many only film mundane, mediocre things their entire career? > (much of which was caused by the tech industry - specifically facebook) I took the tech industry just as a good example of an all round good, well paying job in general, not to pass judgement on what it brings to the world. My comment history could tell you as much. Mass media deserves its share of jabs as I'm sure you agree. But neither of the jabs make any my arguments or conclusion any less valid.
  - iso1631 6y ago
    If you're a high school kid in Inverness wanting to earn a couple of bob on a Saturday afternoon, you could go stack shelves in tesco, or you could point a camera at a local football match, and start getting useful experience. Which is more fulfilling? You might find you're not that good at it, you don't like standing out in the cold, but you might find you have a talent for it, and that leads onto a more formal training course